The invention pertains to a collector of unused water consisting of a head and a remaining part. The head consists of two spherical sections firmly connected to each other: 1) A small section which constitutes the upper part of the head of the collector and comprising a regulator of the incoming water having in its center a through hole whose lips are curved at the top, a water tank having an inlet and an outlet with overflow for the filling of the inlet pipe with water, and a water disturbance absorber from below and 2) a large section, which is the base of the head of the collector, carrying four anti-skid legs of adjustable height for the levelling of the head of the collector and an open-turn pipe which is connected to the water tank which is in the upper part of the head with a small cross-section pipe.
The remaining part of the collector consists of a very flexible pipe connecting the head to the drain, which consists of a pipe inside which there is an open-turn elbow with an extension along the run of the pipe and a side inlet. In the upper part there is an overflow valve. The drain is connected through a flexible pipe to a water storage tank.
From time to time, attempts have been made to lower water consumption, especially that of the households. Mechanisms and ways have been invented, some of which lower the pressure of the water and create spray by inserting air in the pipes, thus creating the impression of quantity while in others there are reduced cross-sections in the water intake pipes (thermomixing sluice valves) where the typical position for use is either open or close, making it impossible for the user to choose another position in between. There are also electromechanical or mechanical switches at the end of the tap.
These mechanisms have the following essential drawbacks:
1) Spray filters need frequent maintenance (screen cleaning.)
2) The reduced cross-sections in the thermomixing sluice valves do not provide economy, they just reduce the waste since they usually function only when fully open.
3) Taps with electromechanical mechanisms cost a lot to buy, require an electric installation all the way to the tap and cannot respond to the multiplicity of household uses. They are, however, suitable for public places with simple uses (washing of hands) and are installed mainly for hygienic purposes.
4) The mechanical mechanisms at the end of the tap not only are they not convenient for the user (the switch is activated by a flexible foil, or something similar, hanging from the tap and hampers most uses) but they also inflict hydraulic damage on the installation due to their abrupt opening and closing.
The dominant mechanisms for water economy to-date are those which create spray water in a variety of ways, giving the impression of quantity. The water saved in this way is little because 1) after the first impressions have subsided, the user seeks the weight of the water he was used to, which leads to a prolongation of the time of the use or the increase in the water flow, and 2) the main problem, which is the wasting of pure water during the intermediate stages of a use, is not countered. Usually, the user either does not reach to turn off the tap during the time he is not using the water, e.g., when washing his hands or shaving, or does not have the time to do so because the time periods are too short, e.g., when washing his face or because he does not wish to alter the water mix in simple taps. The result is that the water wasted in the intermediate stages, when it is not used, is, as a rule, more than the water needed for the use itself. A noteworthy case of water wasting is the one in which we turn on the hot water switch and wait for it to come from the heater. If, furthermore, we have a solar heater, then the waste is especially big.